Breeding Contempt in Educational Institutions!?

The following is an extract from an article by the Rajya Sabha member and daughter of the CM, Kanimozhi Karunanidhi. She raises an important point about the management of schools placing restrictions on the students to practice their religious beliefs. It is significant that someone from the Dravidian Political movement is raising this question too. I think this is worth discussing. 

Recently, someone had similarly mentioned about Roman Catholic educations institutions across the  country shutting down to protest against the Orissa violence against Christians. In Chennai many educational institutions had sent their students on a rainy day to stand as a 'human chain' to protest against the violence on Tamils in Sri Lanka. The kind of religious, idealogical and other sectarian ideas of the mangement being brought to bear upon the students are rather high. Do the students have a choice?

source: Breeding Contemp, a Deliberate Choice by Kanimozhi Karunanidhi in the HINDU dated 10th Dec 2008

Today (December 9) is Bakrid, an important festival for Muslims. And this country has a reasonably large population of Muslims who celebrate that festival. There is a sizeable number of educational institutions run privately that decide to work on this day — institutions whose founders claim to subscribe to other religious beliefs. A few days ago, in a particular school, when the teacher announced a project work for this day, a Muslim student expressed his inability to attend school on that day. She answers him, in a matter-of-fact manner: “Students who do not come to school on that day can consider themselves as failed.”

This would look like a minor incident. But ask the child. I can imagine the anger, the fear, the sense of being excluded, that moment would have created in the mind of the child. When the teacher spoke to him thus, did he feel he was queer? That he was different from the 50-odd students in the class? Will he search for answers when he gets out of school? I can cite many such examples of exclusion and the communal politics that leads to a few more — or fewer — red letters in a school calendar. These attitudes are reflected in many layers and levels.

This is not to blame any particular group or to say the others are all blameless. The others might have different versions of such stories to share. There are many such institutions that play similar games in the name of religion and end up sowing the seeds of hatred and divisiveness in the minds of children. The world today would like to claim that education, the evolution of civilisation, and the experience of wars has brought humanity to understand that people are more important — than even the state. But what we think will lead our next generation to enlightenment, tolerance and peace today, our educational institutions, are turning into production houses of intolerance and hatred. Schools discriminate in terms of the income of parents, on the lines of gender, and sometimes even on the lines of caste, religion and language. However ridiculous and unreal — bordering on the surreal, it may sound — often even on the lines of eating habits.

Some schools, under the excuse of religious sentiments or spiritual beliefs, do not allow children to bring or eat the food of their choice inside the school premises. These rules are often unwritten but enforced. Staff members routinely reprimand students who fail to abide by the unwritten codes. Emboldened by the act of those in authority, other students ostracise those who do not conform. What happens when these children leave school and face people of different belief systems and habits when they start their own lives? Where does it leave them in terms of tolerance if we, under the pretext of protecting them or being sensitive to a particular section, alienate them from experiencing the diversity? If we isolate them from exposure to other cultures or thought processes or faiths — as is being done in many places now — we have to prepare to reap the whirlwind.

PaataShaala Guest Lecture I - Nai Talim

PaataShaala Guest Lecture – Nai Talim, by Shiv Dutt Mishra, Nai Talim Samiti

Date: 2nd September 2008

Participants:
Prof. Swaminathan, retired IIT Delhi Professor, Historian
Balakailasam, Director
Sashikant, Director
Arvind, Professor
Rajsri, Teacher, Sevagram
Ravitha Bhatia, Teacher
Uday Meghani, Activist / Social worker
Chitra Nagesh, Freelance Researcher
Krishnan, Graphic Designer / Activist
Ranjith Henry, Kolam
Balakrishnan, Centre for Women’s Development
Bhuvana, Parent
Ram, Samanvaya
Priya, Samanvaya

A summary of Shri. Shiv Dutt Mishra’s Talk in First person
Let’s take the phrase Nai Talim – “Nai” means new and Talim, which is an Urdu word, means “Education”. On October 22nd 1937 there was a conference in Wardha on education, which was when it was formulated this way, but it was not a new concept that came up that day. Gandhiji started his experiments with education, beginning from his own children, and many years of such experiments came to be called as Nai Talim.

There are 3 basic questions – Why education? What education? And how education?, which have to be answered by any educationist. In his experiments, Gandhiji was very clear that he will work for an education that will not make the person, a servant. Perhaps, he becomes a servant of livelihood, which is a very small part of his entire life. This is not education.

We see today also that education is imparted only for examinations. Those who have an array of educational titles still do not have jobs and those who have little education are still able to support their families. How is this? So, all of the hungama of conventional education, particular syllabus, exams and whatnot are not going to give a person knowledge, practical or otherwise. Even a Ph.D or an M.Sc would not have the confidence or time to teach his own children, he will send them to school! We all know the shortcomings of the mainstream education system that we have and let us not go into it further.

One of the core ideas of Nai Talim is that, education is child-centric, correlated to the swabhava of the child, particularly the Basic and Primary education. The child is not burdened with the idea of learning and education. For instance, modern neurologists say that any child cannot concentrate beyond 15 minutes on one thing, so then we have to make things interesting and fun, maybe bring in change every 15 minutes. Making a child sit in one place and asking him or her to listen or write etc for 40-45 minutes is violence. The child’s nature is to do, create, explore. If we convert the idea of discipline, that listening to the “Do it!” or “Don’t do that!” orders of the teacher is discipline then we won’t get very far with the child’s education. We will only create servants, which is what the whole system is anyway geared to do. Gandhiji was experimenting and designing an education process to make masters, not servants!

Knowledge in organised education has to be connected to reality. In Nai Talim, we say that knowledge is to be imparted through the medium of craft or through real activity and real experience. That which is connected to real life and meaningful work is true education, not by models and projects. Even calling it “learning by doing” would be diluting it. It is not structured and bookish knowledge as is the case with conventional system. Bookish knowledge would cut them off from real life.

The two basic principles of Nai Talim are that 1) whatever education is imparted, should be with the help of some creative / productive craft of that area / region, i.e. craft is the medium (not that they are all going to go out into the world and only practice that craft for their livelihood) and 2) whatever is earned out of such craft would take care of the current expenditure of the school. Reading and writing is one medium of imparting knowledge, craft is another. Gandhiji used to say, and today it is well known, that children should not be started on writing straight away. We should start with sound, and reading aided by pictures, and then gradually script. These methods of teaching are connected to how children learn first through their senses – the first is by touch, he knows his mother by her touch first. Then come sight and sound. Then at one stage they want to taste each and every thing they come across. It is after going through such stages in their development do we need to reach reading and writing. And time is required for everything. There is a certain time by which the coordination between fingers, eyes and mind happens for writing. Every child needs her own time and space to go through this. But today, we all want our children to learn everything quickly. If we go with the child according to his or her swabhava, then we will see that they all learn ‘quickly’. For instance, for children everything is play – this is in their swabhava. For them there is no difference between study or work and play. They learn through play. So if we understand this and remove the divisions in our teaching between study and play time, then we will help along the child in his learning. Take for instance, how the child learns script. For a small child, even the letters are pictures. So if we go by what the child sees and understands from the real world, then we should start with simply getting them to understanding words and their meaning first. And then, with time, break them down into letters / alphabets. In all this, the attitude of the teacher should be that of a mother. First comes love, then everything else.

This teaching should be for real life, for through out their life, not just a part of it. For instance, why do we separate subjects? History can be taught through geography or vice versa. Language is taught in and through every other subject. So we should be aware of this and not isolate language teaching to one class and not bother about it during other subjects. And at the primary level, the child is coming in contact with more and more in the outside world. So our teaching must correlate with his engagement with every day life and world. Whether we want it or not, children are learning all the time, and outside the class room, from everywhere. Then, better to understand and integrate all that too, so that they can make better sense of their world. In this situation, it becomes important that our schools are connected to reality, which means they can help the children understand societal problems and issues of the neighbourhood. This is being connected to the real world. They should be helped to understand society and its culture and their identity in it.

Today, we find that those who have the knowledge of science and theory do not know to work on ground, practically. And those who are actually working with a tool or machine, may not be aware of the science behind it. We have separated and isolated them. Gandhiji in his education process wanted to join the two, and provide an education that will allow the child to explore and express his inherent qualities and grow to their full potential and become ‘Masters’. An integrated understanding such that every child / person as he grows up can think independently, take initiative, be confident and solve problems. Then the problems of the locality and country will automatically get solutions. If we are living in this city and country, then we take responsibility for it, and this starts with the family and school.

Understanding phenomena is the basic thing. And there are so many methods of understanding. Not just one way. It cannot be that there is only one right way. The education process must be such that the child also recognises this type of responsibility and values within herself. They are taught not through textbooks but by observation and doing and routine work. We do not need a whole lot of material for this. We don’t need costly instruments and equipments. If it is to be real life teaching, then the real world materials are the materials of education also. Children also recognise and relate to material that they find in their real life instinctively. Correlation and integration is easier this way. One way to see their learning is to listen to them – they repeat whatever they have learnt and find interesting. The child must be able to talk about their learning process to their parents.

Discussions
In answer to the question, why did the Nai Talim school close in 1974, Shri. Shiv Dutt spoke about the equations between the Nai Talim Samiti and the Sarva Seva Sangh, and that ultimately it closed due to lack of teachers.

During a discussion on higher education and the Sevagram Vishwa Vidyalaya, Shiv Dutt spoke about how in Nai Talim, whatever is taught in the conventional system can be completed by the students in 8 years. He further added that if the children do not learn certain things going the Nai Talim that they may have learnt in the conventional system, then he is confident that they don’t need those things in their life since Nai Talim is for real life!

Ram, Samanvaya said that there are many schools that have been started by picking up and adapting ideas from Gandhi and Nai Talim. He described a school that had existed just outside Chennai, and that the old woman who had been running it said that she has been doing so along Gandhian lines. She has heard Gandhiji only once and visited Sevagram a few times. He went on to say that however that such an institution exists is not known even to Gandhians in Chennai. His question was whether there has been any attempt to get to know such people who have been inspired by Gandhiji’s ideas and started educational ventures, since this would give us a picture of how these ideas have spread. His concern was that we should not fall into the rut of centralised thinking that Nai Talim can only be in Sevagram and others must follow suit.

Shiv Dutt in answer said that Nai Talim is not a method and that it must be taken in spirit and adaptations will obviously have come. He added that with poor understanding we will just try to correlate and do things absolutely by the letter and that wont work. He stated that innovation, which also implies adaptation, will only work. He further emphasised that the point is that knowledge must be related to real life and inter-relation must happen, then only will real understanding take place and our children will really think. What the student understands is a lesson for the teacher; it is his responsibility to create an environment where leaning happens – he or she is a facilitator.

Another question that came up was that since Nai Talim as a concept is for the age group 7 – 14, what of children before the age of 7. In answer Shiv Dutt said that largely principles of Nai Talim with regard to child and learning will be the same way. He further said that in that age group, they are learning how the outside world works and learning to interact with it and we have to help them in this process.

There was a discussion on whether there is material online on Nai Talim. However it was realised that at the moment there is no comprehensive material. Much of the material is with the Multiversity group and volunteers are needed to upload the material onto the web.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shiv Dutt Mishra has been associated with the Nai Taleem Samiti and the Sevagram Ashram for almost a decade. He has authored two books in Hindi, on the concepts and practice of Nai Taleem idea and its spread and variations. He has also been a close aide of Shri. Dharampal in the last 5 years of Dharampalji's life, working closely with him in particular in his Hindi writings. Academically he is trained in economics and law and is a student of Allahabad University.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Priya

ABL - How's and What's - 12 January 2008

Participants: Vijaya, Alexander, Ranjan De, Amukta Mahapatra, Dr. L.S. Saraswathi, Reineke, Melinda, Subha, Atmapraana Amba, Nishkaamya Praana, Nidosha Praana, Ram, Priya

Note: Amukta joined the Paatashaala session to talk about how ABL works, the philosophy and methods of ABL and how they developed it.

A summary of Ms. Amukta Mahapatra’s talk and discussions
Amukta started the discussion by saying that why ABL was conceptualised and introduced is more important than the genesis itself. The problems that were identified by the government were many and ABL came as one way to tackle some of these problems.

The primary problems were that children were not learning and there was only a one point source of teaching – the teacher. In the class room the children were just obedient or not; nothing else defined them within the classroom – many problems were identified with the classroom processes. ABL was introduced as the solution and it has achieved a couple of things in the last 5-6 years since it has been brought in –

- It has succeeded in changing the geography of the class room

- Children can do things on their own. Teacher is not the only resource in the classroom

- It has helped the teachers re-look at their own roles in the classroom

ABL has opened up methodologies and ideas. For example, instead of the conventional class rooms, there are subject class rooms like maths room and language room, and the group is a mixed age-group… this has brought in newer ways of learning like never before. For instance, child-to-child learning.

An ABL classroom:
There are 6 circles / groups of mixed age children in one class room. These groups are formed on the basis of their learning, like “Teacher needed”, “Peer support”, “Self learn”, “Partial teacher support” and so on.

There are activity charts for the children, and there is the ladder chart for each subject with milestones on it for the child to see for herself what her progress is. Textbooks are not used by the children in the conventional way of mugging up. There are flash cards that are colour coded for the different levels, with each containing one concept. This is what is used primarily by the children along with the activity charts and a few other aids. The activity is curriculum driven and the child does not choose.

The subjects are Language (English, Tamil), Maths, EVS, Social studies and Science.

The questions that came up for discussion are as follows:

- How have the teachers taken the change and transitioned from earlier to now

- On what basis are the 6 circles chosen

- Is not this class room process difficult when the teacher has to look after 40 students

- How do teachers identify when some circle who are on their own have learnt correctly

- What is the feedback from the children

- How do they learn English language and grammar

- How is it decided which group does a child go to

- Which class / Std is the child in then

Amukta spoke to the group about the nature of the circles, that they are dynamic and keep changing according to the learning needs and progress. This is determined by the evaluation charts by which the child knows how much progress she has made and what she has to do next. All material is learner’s material, not teaching aids. This is important to remember, and it is the learner’s responsibility to learn and finish. The onus for learning has shifted from the teacher for 40 students to each child for herself.

Philosophy behind the restructuring of the classroom

But the concern remained among the group that the teacher still has a lot to do, since she has to individually spend time with the children at all 6 levels and whether this would be happening effectively.

Questions and a discussion on the philosophy behind the restructuring of the class room followed. The concern was whether this is only going to be a structural change or it would go deeper. One of the participants, Alexander, pointed out one problem that he has noticed, of contrariness of values, which would not change if things remain at the structural level – he spoke about how the industry and professionals are constantly asked to cultivate or given training in team work, but in schools, al the focus is on the individual and individual identity.

The other associated question was whether this was connected to real life for the child; that this is methodology but how is it changing what she is learning and in what way – the content. Apropos, the other concern was that there is no change in the value system.

Amukta spoke about how even if the content of textbooks has not explicitly changed, such methods cannot be practiced without some changes in the way the content is looked at, which in itself is a major change. The teacher’s solitary authority in the class room is now questioned; there are other resource points for the children. This leaves the teacher to engage with the children freely and the scope for the teacher and child to co-learn expands dramatically. It is true that though all are in their circles, the learning happens individually and hence the teacher has to be aware of each child’s learning level. This, from what is happening on the field, is not so difficult, and teacher training and meetings at every level is being given importance. The one thing to remember even the classroom processes should not be rigidified, as this would again create problems.

Dr.L.S. Saraswathi mentioned here that even the terms ‘content’ and ‘methodology’ are obsolete; If we were to look at them as ‘process’ and ‘practice’, then the entire dynamics would change and how can there be a change in one without affecting the other? She also said that value is in everything, they cannot be taught separately as one component, they will have to be part of everything that they child does.

There were other miscellaneous discussions on parents and their expectations from the children as well as the school, peer support etc.

In summarising, Ram said that it is always taken for granted that private players are pioneers, but in this the government has come forward with the change and this is very good. HE continued saying that however there are huge obstacles to cross, since this is still in transition phase and our very language and terms of reference will have to change.

Amukta concluded saying that a mention has to be made of Sarva Siksha Abhiyaan Official, Mr. Vijay Kumar, who has made all the difference and made this change possible.

Amukta’s Inputs on the Board
Problems in Present schooling system	Changes seen as a result of solutions presented by ABL	Difficulties at Field Level
- Herd teaching - Children not learning, even reading, writing and maths - teacher is a mere policeman - children idle most of the time or tracing mechanically - all children doing the same thing at the same time in the same manner	- individual, group and collective learning - children able to read and write by class 2 - maths skills are pretty high - each child learns at her / his own pace	- not enough teacher support in the field - training is too brief, focused on ladder, logos and charts - circle, not child directed - danger of mechanical learning if not enough care

- Priya

Quotable Quotes from the January 2008 session

"We are changing the system, but we are also resisting the change"
- Ranjan De, 12th January 2008, Paatashaala session on ABL